I feel there is something very fishy going on as well. It was too easy a bust, she was too low on the totem pole to actually be a major player, and it's too convenient for the MSM narrative of "Russia haxed the election!". Almost as if they realized the Comey testimony would turn out to be bullshit and wanted to add some more kindling to the fire.

You would be surprised at how much access some low ranking members have depending on their career field.

I had a top secret clearance when I was 18 because I worked in IT security.

you should have leaked it before he did

Almost as if they realized the Comey testimony would turn out to be bullshit and wanted to add some more kindling to the fire.

If that's true why were the rumors that Trump wanted to see if he can use executive privilege to knock it off?

He's not going too. So we will see what comey has to say.

Why where there rumors about Trump doing something bad?

When are there not rumors about Trump flying around?

Because the media makes up rumors every day to make Trump look bad?

I'm sure there's more than that. I don't think those rumors are unfounded.

Considering the results? You still think those rumors had merit when Trump himself did the exact opposite?

How do you know he didn't consider it? That's all the rumors were, right? What about those rumors about Sean Spicer on his way out? And suddenly we see Sarah Huckabee a whole lot more and some bushes shenanigans? Sure they leaks aren't perfect, but the WH is leaking like a sieve.

Just because there are leaks doesn't make every rumor suddenly true. I go by results, and when the results show the rumors to be bullshit I understand why I don't go by rumors alone.

Absolutely agree. I say it's likely, not 100% certain.

This can't be true because it doesn't align with my pre-concieved narrative.

JFC this sub.

she was too low on the totem pole to actually be a major player

The fucking irony of this statement regarding the rights obsession with Seth Rich.

Why do you think only "the right" cares about the murder of Seth Rich? I've talked to people from all walks of life who are concerned with this unsolved murder.

The point, if you care to actually read my post, is that they're now saying this girl couldn't have access to this but they have no qualms doing that exact same jump when it comes to Seth.

Because it's not about evidence, it's about narrative.

You didn't even come close to addressing my question that I asked you though. Your point doesn't address why you're trying to (and seemingly always try to) make this a partisan issue.

It is a blatently partisan issue, and just because some anti-DNC leftists have jumped on the Seth Rich bandwagon doesnt change that. Look who pushes the Rich story: Hannity, Daily Caller, Breitbart, WND --- all major and openly right wing sources.

And here now, we see a huge double standard, which you dont want to address. Suddenly when its Reality Winner instead of Seth Rich, arguments like "she couldn't have had access to the documents", "shes too low ranking", "her social media shows shes biased, so it's fake" etc are somehow upvoted.

Thanks for clarifying what the other poster was communicating about. I disagree with your rhetoric though.

You're trying to deflect and now you're trying to ask why I didn't fall for your deflection.

I'm actually making this a non partisan issue. I don't mind either being investigated.

What I'm doing is pointing out the hypocrisy in the rights current stance attacking leakers and now claiming that she couldn't have had this access (while not doing the same thing in a case where it's more applicable with Seth)

I haven't deflected anything. I asked you a question which you never addressed.

He isn't here to address your questions, he is here to repeat his narrative over, and over, and over, and over, and over.

It's sloppy as fuck.

He's trying to make it a partisan issue instead of a conspiracy issue. Tjere are alot of new posters here trying to do the same thing, divide us up into easy to manipulate groups.

I'm not new. I've posted here a hundred times.

Im attacking what you're saying because it's bullshit. Trying to divide us by R and D when we're typically all here for the same reason, we don't buy what the MSM is selling.

Maybe she was used. Could have been entrapment where they knew she would leak and fed her some bullshit. A useful idiot

Who knows. Just weird how someone like that could be given that much clearance

It's not that weird. I held a top secret when I was 18 and a E-2

This has nothing to do with age. Go look at her twitter. There is no way I would give someone like that any clearance. I wouldn't even give her access to the company credit card.

What does that have to do with anything? Your security clearance is not based off what you post on social media.

ummmm, yes it is. You claim to have held clearance, but then make a statement like this. Your clearance ABSOLUTELY depends on things like your social media.

BS. I work in civilian services for the military with the highest SC a civilian can have. No one looks at my Facebook/reddit/twitter.

Not true. I hold clearance right now, civilian, and no one is checking my social media posts.

sure, no one is checking your social media posts.

It's not true.

Perhaps for extreme vetting like working in the Whitehouse or as an FBI agent they would go to such lengths.

Working as a contractor on a government contract with hundreds of other people, no one is checking our Facebooks.

Such lengths?! such lengths as looking up your facebook account? Really? I got interviewed by an FBI agent when my friend went to fly drones for a private company. They took the time to find me, arrange a meeting and ask me questions. You honestly believe that before they do that, they wouldn't look up my friends social media history? Get out of here. And what do you mean by "it's not relevant"?

You think you know better so your opinion isn't relevant.

I'm sitting here right now with my clearance wondering wtf you're talking about.

I think I know better, so my opinion isn't relevant. Ok. Nice conversation. Have a nice night.

Here from your favorite source.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/05/13/want-a-security-clearance-feds-will-now-check-your-facebook-and-twitter-first/?utm_term=.f8c7ce4bec24

Yeah, that's the new policy. It didn't apply when I and thousands of others got 5 year clearances.

So should they be checking your posts? Honestly I thought they are checking everyones... they are just recording everyones step but they only go looking at it if they think they need to? I just dont understand how any events can be planned if they have this much surveilance.

actually, having previously held a top secret clearance... they are very backed up on said requests and often cut corners. I think you seriously overestimate the detail they do of the average top secret clearance request. If you have no red flags you are probably getting the fast track.

I linked to a Washington post article that says they do in fact check an applicants social media, which is what this conversation was about. To think they wouldn't, busy or not, is preposterous. It takes all of 3 minutes, and could tell you more about the person than any answer on their form

wasn't social media back in my day but I do know my application was rushed through and no one i know was contacted with questions in any way. I'm not saying they don't do it, i'm saying they don't do it 100% of the time. conservatively from what i can find in quick searches there are greater than 4 million active security clearances right now. that's a lot of vetting.

While I agree that is a lot of vetting, she was working for the NSA. If there were ever to be a more extreme vetting, especially after Snowden, it would be for that position. And also, like I said earlier, when my friend went to fly drones for a private company, I got interviewed by the FBI. Maybe that's not always the case, but to think they would not do something as easy as checking your social media (as EVERY employer now does after and interview) is pretty crazy.

Got to love when you catch one parroting absolute, easily refuted falsehoods, and they just delete all their comments. It's like a little victory!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/05/13/want-a-security-clearance-feds-will-now-check-your-facebook-and-twitter-first/?utm_term=.f8c7ce4bec24

Your security clearance is not based off what you post on social media.

yea it is...

When I was serving it wasn't. I just learned based time did that Washington post that I was wrong.

Did your social media include months of comments trashing the current administration and how white genocide is a good thing?

C'mon now, there is no way someone like that would get security clearance. This is defnitely a psy op.

Did your social media include months of comments trashing the current administration

Yes. Bush was President at the time, and I'm a liberal, so of course I was bashing him.

how white genocide is a good thing?

Where in the world did this come from?

You're already deleted your other replies in this comment chain so you know background checks go through your social media. No clue why you're taking the time to continue the farce in my replies.

I didn't delete any comments. That was another user. I'm not in the service anymore and I don't have a TS anymore as well.

I respectfully ask that you answer my question please.

It sure looks like your comments, you're suspiciously absent from the comment chain where the deleted replies start.

As for your question I misremembered the white genocide part, it was racist and anti white however.

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=56840

"being white is terrorism"

Don't think many would pass a security background check with that in your social media feed, even if you ignore the anti Trump rhetoric.

It's not my comments and it's not my alt.1

I didn't realize she said that, I thought you were referring to me. I don't understand how people like her can say or think something so dumb.

I don't understand how people like her can say or think something so dumb.

Even less understandable is how they can get high level security clearance, considering it's both racist and invokes charges of terrorism.

She had the security clearance before she said that

that was a different user that came to defend his position. Once it was shown they were parroting out right fabrications, the comments were all deleted.

Interesting coincidence that it happened at the same time he stopped replying in the comment chain directed towards him. Thanks for the heads up though.

She is clearly a patsy. The whole thing is just way too convenient. "Hey this whole Russia narrative isn't gaining traction like we hoped, what we need is a good leak to 'prove' it's super duper 100% true. Now we just need someone to do the leaking, oh look who we have here!"

Im not sure youve noticed, but the "Russian narrative" has gained a lot of traction. There are two Congressional committees, a special prosecutor and Comey's live testimony is going to be carried live on most news channels. Trump's team is lawyering up. Id call that traction.

It actually had not gained traction. It's losing traction. Especially since you have a guy in Washington that admitted to the public license that the FBI tried to set him up with money and citizenship to lie and say he was a. Russian hacker.

Just like Brazille, there was no Russian.

I understand it is difficult to build the reality youd like out of the actual facts at hand, but the guy who "admitted to the public licence" (?) regarding to hacking is in the Czech Republic, not Washington and made his statement to Russian media:

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/11/yevgeny-nikulin-alleged-russian-hacker-claims-fbi-/

The Justice Department has charged Mr. Nikulin with hacking LinkedIn, Dropbox and Formspring, but not for cyberattacks on the political targets compromised during the run up to last year’s election. The U.S. government has largely attributed those cyberattacks to a division of Russia’s military intelligence agency, GRU, referred to by names including APT 28, Pawn Storm and Fancy Bear.

You can argue semantics but your fiction does not change reality.

There is still not one shred of evidence that proves there was collusion between trump and Russia.

And all examples that the left used during the election have all been proven lies by the liars themselves.

Deep state wants trump impeached, that's all there is here.

Every leak that hurts Trump or Russia is "bullshit" to the nice folks here at r/conspiracy. Bringing up the fact that she doesn't like Trump doesn't matter at all. Nobody leaks anything because they love the person they work for. All leakers disagree with something their leader is doing. That's the entire fuckin reason for leaking something. Assange is defending her too. Hilarious that when Assange leaks stuff that hurts the DNC, leaks are amazing. When Assange defends a leaked that hurts trump, WTF ASSANGE!? Absolutely love the hypocrisy.

Party over country. Sad.

Bringing up the fact that she doesn't like Trump doesn't matter at all

What I find funny about this is that there was a massive push for "Seth Rich was actually a Bernie supporter and leaked as revenge because he hates Hillary" not even a month ago. But all of a sudden it's terrible to leak something just because you hate someone. Also the "how would they even be able to access the documents that were leaked" argument is completely disregarded when you ask the same thing about Rich. The hypocrisy from some people here is crazy.

Also, when people asked how Rich could have access to the emails, many people pointed out that he had access to databases, but in the case of Winner they seem to think it impossible that such a document would find its way into her hands.

It's like partisan hackery Trumps critical thought I guess.

Well he worked with data analysis, so he knew about computers.... or that's how it had been explained to me when I asked why he had access to other employees emails

Makes me so fucking angry.

Never have i talked shit about Seth Rich. I talk shit about the people who pretend to give a fuck about Seth life for their own political profit. But never him and what he (might) have done.

People are blind and totally ignoring facts just because it doesnt fit their narrative

Just curious, but do you have a source for her defending her?

I kind of would be surprised if he didn't defend her since that is kind of how WikiLeaks works, you know?

But what I am most curious about are the contents of the leak and more specifically the technical details of it. Any idea of Assange confirmed that?

He made a few tweets about it. This is the first one though.

I despise the R party, but D's are just as much hypocritical. That is the problem, both our major parties are corrupt hypocrites. The DNC showed favoritism during the primary, there is a damn class action lawsuit going on, the DNC are their supporters deny everything. Party over country for both sides.

I never knew why both the pres and vice pres are from the same party, and why didnt a third party canidate do any better.

Bush, Clintons, Obamas, Trumps are all the same.

like you would have voted for something different!
you too are the same... you want the same.

Nobody is saying "wtf assange"

More like "wtf do we care about phishing attempts?"

It's like getting news that the DNC also received spam e-mail. Phishing attempts occur constantly, everywhere.

He's not saying it's damaging he's saying the story is bullshit. While h it does, the whole thing is sketchy as shit.

And there is still no proof of Russian collusion.

The Podesta hack was done via spearfishing. Doesn't surprise me at all that others fell for it here too.

The report doesn't actually confirm if the phishing was successful, or if anything was even "hacked" after.

That's why it's bullshit.

Wow

Can anyone provide me the details of the claims in the leak and technical details of the hack? I work for a research company and I am sure our CTO would like to see it.

It's more of an overview

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3766950-NSA-Report-on-Russia-Spearphishing.html#document/p1

You sir, is the real reality winner!

They will hack for hillary, not trump. All of this is a total distraction on real conspiracies such as the upcoming martial law and fema camps.

Go on...

lol actual conspiracy user gets downvoted. It used to be in this forum, comments like this would at best be read and then the reader would move on. The fact that some of our favorite conspiracy theories are getting massively downvoted in here really sucks.

Crowdstrike hacked the election!! This is their cover

And as crazy as this claim sounds, the exact same evidence we have that "it's the russians" could be used to argue that it was crowdstrike, after what we learned from the vault 7 releases.

Assange is cia or mossad

Full denial of the Trumpsters. Only leaks that hurt the DNC are real. My ass....

No, only leaks that are real are real.

Have a great day- I won't be responding if you feel there is something else you need to say to this, because it's important I use my energy in places where it can effect real change and not endless, repetitive debate.

I just read this as: "I disagree but have no arguments so leave me alone." Sad.

Your admitted assumption is "that's how you read it."

So that's rather meaningless and not sad at all.

The leaks that are real matter. The ones that are from the CIA, don't. Very simple.

No, only leaks that are real are real

and the only real leaks just coincidentally harm the DNC. If you ever doubt it, just remember, Spicers mantra: the leaks are real, but the news is fake.

No. Only the leaks that are real are real. It's very simple. Some leaks come from our deep state. Some don't. The difference is who is leaking them.

It is really hard to jump on board with something when your paycheck demands that you don't.

Why do I feel like this was set up as some sort of deterrent threat against leakers? The intercept of all places, at fault here. It seems the journo involved here has infamousy from the shit tier journalism at Gawker that led to their destruction. Coincidence it's the same journo involved here?

A young woman works at one of the american agencies.

She finds documents saying some voting stations was hacked by whoever.

She sends the documents to the one of the media who don't belive in the russian hacking the election.

Wikileaks stand behind her and call her a whistleblower.

People with names as DeplorebleXXX, TrumpXXX, KEKXXX and so on call on her to get death penalty, calling her a treasonous cunt, non american, leaker not whistleblower.

People are just shit. From the left to the right.

This is flat earther level of denial.

Reality Leigh Winner= Weiner in Get Hillary

you all would be surprised how many "news stories" are just coded communications

BS. I work in civilian services for the military with the highest SC a civilian can have. No one looks at my Facebook/reddit/twitter.

Not true. I hold clearance right now, civilian, and no one is checking my social media posts.

It's not true.

Perhaps for extreme vetting like working in the Whitehouse or as an FBI agent they would go to such lengths.

Working as a contractor on a government contract with hundreds of other people, no one is checking our Facebooks.

Yeah, that's the new policy. It didn't apply when I and thousands of others got 5 year clearances.

actually, having previously held a top secret clearance... they are very backed up on said requests and often cut corners. I think you seriously overestimate the detail they do of the average top secret clearance request. If you have no red flags you are probably getting the fast track.

Im attacking what you're saying because it's bullshit. Trying to divide us by R and D when we're typically all here for the same reason, we don't buy what the MSM is selling.

Got to love when you catch one parroting absolute, easily refuted falsehoods, and they just delete all their comments. It's like a little victory!

She had the security clearance before she said that